arachne-digest Thursday, January 2 2003 Volume 01 : Number 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 13:43:16 -0500
From: Roger Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ara 171 Lite
I, too, have been somewhat perplexed about where to find all these
"improvements" that I have been reading about on the list. I downloaded and
have been using 1.71ue01 for several months now, but now wanted to get the
"new and improved" Arachne.
I remembered that I had downloaded 1.71ue01 from Glenn McC's web site, but it
isn't/wasn't Glenn's "download" web site.
Searching my brain, it seemed that I remembered the web site being something
like, <www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/ara171ue01.htm>, and tried it. Lo and
behold!, there it was, including an "upgrade" file (ug2curnt.zip) containing
only those files that were changed.
HTH
Roger Turk
Tucson, Arizona
Bastiaan wrote:
. > Hi Kali
. > I realy don't know anymore... this is becoming quite confusing!
. > 1.71UE has been altered several times and they are not at Arachne
. > home-page.
. > The first 1.71UE version I downloaded was stored on floppy and
. > installed.
. > Later on wwwman.exe was altered, which I downloaded separately.
. > Also printing has been altered => new release
. > Perhaps Glenn will make summary of the releases and where to find them.
. > Wishing you all a very fine 2003 and a bright future to Arachne.
. > Bastiaan
. > On Mon, 27 Sep 1999 22:00:39 +0010, Keith McLaughlin wrote:
. > > On Sun, 29 Dec 2002 00:34:08 +00, Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote:
. > >> I just installed Arachne 171 Lite edition...
. > > Dear Bastian:
. > > I know someone on the list answered this question already, but where can
. > > I go to download arachne 1.71?
. > > I am on Dads computer and cant go through my folders. I am
. > > veryinterested in the direction Arachne is moving in dealing with https
. > > and javascript problems.
. > > Regards
. > > Kali
. > > This is written by Kali on the computer of Keith Mclaughlin at Bays Hill
. > > Taree. to "reply to" please address email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 13:53:24 -0600
From: "Glenn Gilbreath Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: arachne-digest V1 #2002
Hiya Gang!
First off....Happy New Year! Hehehe...
Now, on to my opinions...
Glennmcc asked is there is any "practical" use for Java
inside Arachne...simple answer, correct answer...NO!!!
While it may be that Java is an OS of sorts, and some
JVMs (Java Virtual Machines) exist for various other
operating systems, in MANY years of Internet use, I have
yet to stumble across anything where it was absolutely
necessary to have JVM...over the course of my adventures
and explorations, the only Java Applets I have used were
a few simple games, prizepoint.com, and a few other small
applets...a couple are even on my first website on AOHell,
members.aol.com/GLENNRPH/glennrph.htm, a banner
for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
and a simple "news bulletin" ticker. The pages display
just fine without Java. There's my vote...no JVM for DOS!
OK, the final topic is MTA, mail transport agent...while it
is true there are quite a number for DOS, I still vote for
NetMail DOS 2.12 by Marc Ressl...it is faster and easier
to setup than any other I've tried, which includes FDSMTPOP.
As for using stricly CORE.EXE, well...if you can do it, fine.
I think though that some of us may be missing the point
entirely of WHY Arachne was developed in the first place
back in 1996...xChaos had in mind a complete "Internet Suite"
for rather obsolete DOS computers. Arachne WAS NOT
intended as a front end for any database program, nor as
a shell for DOS...though with some work it can be used as
such. For users to somehow imply that Arachne is inferior
because it doesn't interface well with XML docs, or some DB2
or FoxPro database is sort of silly, IMNSHO. What you can
do is write a simple BATCH program to launch your database
software, copy that to your Arachne\OOPS directory then rename
it to something like DATABASE.OOK, and your set...if desired you
can even assign an icon inside WWWMAN.CFG. There, that wasn't
so freackin' hard now was it?
Finally, a tip about EEK and OOK files...Read the docs folks! Plain as
day, they say that EEK files a small DOS batch programs which CAN
pass DOS variables to CORE.EXE or other executables...OOKs are
BATCH programs which run completely outside of Arachne.
OK, enough for todays lessons...Happy New Year!
Wiz <{;-)
Glenn
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 21:38:08 -0000
From: "John Sparks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Again: bootmanager sbminst.exe :-((
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 3:53 PM
Subject: Again: bootmanager sbminst.exe :-((
> hi List,
>
> A week ago I mentioned no succes in installing the smart boot manager
> from XOSL.
>
> I got the full program including the manual... read it and tried again.
>
> :-( results were different but not good:
>
> ********************
>
> Critical ERROR: Unable to load XOSL image.
>
> -- XOSL Bypass --
>
> Enter XOSL password:
>
> ******************** No mention at all of a password in the manual
> I tried several passwords... but :-(
>
> ******************************************************************
>
> Tried also "Boot it Next Generation"... %^&$#%$@
>
> Many hours down the drain... an still just one OS on this machine.
> (DOS + Win95 combination)
>
> Regards, Bastiaan
>
Can't help with XOSL, but you can check your partitions with Ranish without
altering anything on the disk. Just place the two Ranish files on a DOS boot
floppy and type
CWSDPMI
PART
and you should get a screen showing all the partitions on the first HDD and
details on the selected partition (look at each in turn) I have come across
cases where mismatching information is highlighted. There is a help screen
which shows the options which include the ability to look at other HDD's
which may be present.
If all looks well you can write a new MBR (Master Boot Record) which
contains Boot options which allow any bootable partition to be selected at
Boot time. eg I get a screen output of
HD1/4............
If I do nothing for 5 sec then disk 1 partition 4 boots. I have 3 bootable
partitions which can be selected by input of digit 1,2, or 3. Very basic but
the code fits in the MBR.
Have never had a problem if the partition parameters are OK.
HTH
John
- ---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 25/12/02
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 18:03:48 -0500
From: "Glenn McCorkle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ara 171 Lite
On Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:30:23 +00, Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote:
> Hi Kali
> I realy don't know anymore... this is becoming quite confusing!
http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/ara171ue01.htm
> 1.71UE has been altered several times and they are not at Arachne
> home-page.
http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/ara171ue01.htm
> The first 1.71UE version I downloaded was stored on floppy and
> installed.
http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/ara171ue01.htm
> Later on wwwman.exe was altered, which I downloaded separately.
http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/wwwman.htm
> Also printing has been altered => new release
http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/ara171ue01.htm
> Perhaps Glenn will make summary of the releases and where to find them.
http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/ara171ue01.htm
> Wishing you all a very fine 2003 and a bright future to Arachne.
> Bastiaan
> On Mon, 27 Sep 1999 22:00:39 +0010, Keith McLaughlin wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Dec 2002 00:34:08 +00, Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote:
>>> I just installed Arachne 171 Lite edition...
>> Dear Bastian:
>> I know someone on the list answered this question already, but where can
>> I go to download arachne 1.71?
Here, and mixed through this message.
Are all of the web addresses where it can be had.
http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/ara171ue01.htm
>> I am on Dads computer and cant go through my folders. I am
>> very interested in the direction Arachne is moving in dealing with https
>> and javascript problems.
>> Regards
>> Kali
>> This is written by Kali on the computer of Keith Mclaughlin at Bays Hill
>> Taree. to "reply to" please address email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/ara171ue01.htm
- --
Glenn
http://arachne.cz/
http://www.delorie.com/listserv/mime/
http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/download.htm
http://www.thispagecannotbedisplayed.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 21:17:57
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: External use of Insight
>Reply to Sender: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply to List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>With UKA_PPP do:
>
>a) For pop3:
>tcpport.exe pop3.mail.domain 110 x_popn.exe user:password
>
>b) For smtp:
>tcpport.exe smtp.mail.domain 25 x_mailn.exe
>
>Both x_*.exe are written in QuickBasic and work very well in this
>80286.
Hi Alejandro,
that is quite interesting. I had a look at the two binaries with
these names in my uka_ppp directory. There was no readable text inside
indicating a compiler. Do you have access to a Basic source?
Although I had been playing some time with uka_ppp I did not
figure out how it handles outgoing mail. What file format is
required? Will it be able to use Arachne's .tbs? What about
Pmail .msg files? Do you know of any documentation on this issue?
Christof Lange
_______________________________________________
Christof Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Prokopova 4, 130 00 Praha 3, Czech Republic
phone: (+420) 222 78 06 73 / 222 78 20 02
http://www.volny.cz/cce.zizkov
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 21:01:18 -0500 (EST)
From: "Thomas Mueller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: arachne-digest V1 #1997
from "Ray Andrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Speaking of the future of Arachne, and the growing difficulty we are having
> ignoring Java, this monstrous thought entered my head a while ago, and
> I can't make it go away, so I may as well tell ya:
> What about "Arachne for Windows" ?
> BURN!
> Yes, I know Brothers and Sisters, I *must* burn for it, but first let me
> make my case:
Java is not for Windows only, so Arachne with Java is possible for Linux or
possibly anything but DOS. Besides, there are doubts as to the compatibility
of Windows Java with Java on other OSes, as Bill Gates tries to make Java work
only on Windows. So what about Arachne for Linux, and perhaps the BSDs too,
with Java? Then you won't have to burn.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 18:18:36 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: arachne-digest V1 #2002
Gee, Wiz (or GEE WIZ !!!),
On Wed, 1 Jan 2003 13:53:24 -0600 "Glenn Gilbreath Jr."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think though that some of us may be missing the point
> entirely of WHY Arachne was developed in the first place
> back in 1996...xChaos had in mind a complete "Internet Suite"
> for rather obsolete DOS computers.
Some would argue that Arachne - like DOS or the dinosaur - must grow and
adapt, or die. It matters not why Arachne was developed. If it doesn't
meet the continuing needs of some users, then they will move on. At some
point, there are no more users (and no more updates). That's probably why
there is no Arachne code written for the Commodore 64.
> Arachne WAS NOT
> intended as a front end for any database program, nor as
> a shell for DOS...though with some work it can be used as
> such.
And air conditioning wasn't intended as a cooling device for vehicles. So
what?
Here in the Arizona desert, most people are happy that somebody pushed
the envelope. We're also happy for electrical starters, power steering,
and power brakes. We've even replaced our tube radios with newer devices
that use electronic components.
> For users to somehow imply that Arachne is inferior
> because it doesn't interface well with XML docs, or some DB2
> or FoxPro database is sort of silly, IMNSHO.
A search of past email reveals ZERO use of the word INFERIOR. But, maybe
I deleted those emails. At any rate, I don't recall anyone suggesting
that Arachne was inferior. Not extended in the directions some might find
useful, but never inferior. My favorite adjective happens to be GREAT.
I'm hoping for greatER.
> What you can
> do is write a simple BATCH program to launch your database
> software, copy that to your Arachne\OOPS directory then rename
> it to something like DATABASE.OOK, and your set...if desired you
> can even assign an icon inside WWWMAN.CFG. There, that wasn't
> so freackin' hard now was it?
Except that it doesn't work like that.
Shelling out to a program is just that - shelling OUT. The user must
still maneuver through the outside program's interface. If a DBMS looked
and operated exactly like an HTML form, then there would be no problem.
But none of them do.
My desire is to see a DBMS interface that operates from an HTML form.
When someone is taught how to use Arachne and HTML, they would
simultaneously be able to use a database. I work mostly with people who
are not familiar with electronic equipment. Lesson One is the on-off
switch. Teaching two separate (and fundamentally different) program
interfaces is counter productive to quick developmental progress.
Such a HTML-DBMS Arachne interface would open up a lot of opportunities
for all Arachne users. I've received several emails (off list) from
Arachnoids using CD-ROMs as a data server, although the data is
pre-formatted in TXT or HTM files. DB files would be even more flexible,
allowing comparisons, and-or, if-then, and a bunch of other handy
commands.
> Finally, a tip about EEK and OOK files...Read the docs folks! Plain
> as day,
Apparently not, if "folks" (plural) keep asking. Rumor has it that EEK
was originally a verbal exclamation from an early Arachne user, who was
trying to figure out the file scheme and structure.
By the way, if the instructions were in a database format, they would
have been quickly located and consolidated. Hence, fewer questions to the
list.
> OK, enough for todays lessons...Happy New Year!
Ditto.
Bob
- -
________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 06:18:21 +0100
From: Michael Polak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: new www.arachne.cz...
I plan to update Arachne Labs homepage soon. More orineted to
webhosting, server housing, wi-fi (which is what I am doing most of the
time just now - lots of antennas, simply serius regional ISP... ;-)..
(BTW, if you haven't tried connection sharing with Wi-fi, think about
it. Z-com XI-626 Wi-Fi card with Prism 2.5 chipset is extremely cool
solution, we got even 9 km long connection running in Prague, as part of
www.czfree.net... ;-) of course, my connection in my region are just up
to 1.7 km long... ;-)
But what about Arachne User Edition ? Is there anything really tested by
many people, ready to be published on browser.arachne.cz together with
1.70 ? What about your 1.71 UE, 1.71 lite, etc ?
Any package I can immediately put online, without having to chack for
dark-grey F1 help, etc. ? ;-)
Any latest source code package? I just remember latest 1.71 to be too
unfinished for me to take some action... aditionaly, it was too unclear,
that there were too many 3rd party changes to my original package....
Anyone want FTP access to browser.arachne.cz/apm/ ? (I realy don't want
to care about DOS version and DOS plugins any more...) Or someone to
care about national translations ? many people offered it...
I hope to fix mailing lists soon (probably with some web interface to do
the work... majorodomo went finaly crazy with latest sendamil upgrade...
some access rights problem...)
- --
Michael "xChaos" Polak, +420 603 872 631
http://www.czfree.net - Prague WiFi community
http://arachne.cz/ - webhosting, Linux, WWW browser Arachne
http://teckacz.cz/ - e-zine pro roztristene vedomi
http://mp3records.cz/ - download music 100% legal and free
http://vojna.cz/ - hnuti za zruseni vojenske i civilni sluzby
http://legalizace.cz/ - stop drug war and release victims!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 12:44:06 +0200
From: "Cristian Burneci" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: arachne-digest V1 #2002
HTML-DBMS interface looks doable
I did a little research on the DGI aspects and found out the following:
(maybe this is a bit like reinventing the wheel, but...)
- - First one has to have a little knowledge about HTML forms and CGIs
- - Then read "dgi.txt" and the syntax rules of "mime.cfg". For instance
"inbox.dgi" is not an executable file as one may expect, but a parameter
located in one of the "mime.cfg" lines (same like "image/jpg"). Search
there for it and observe in what way "inbox.dgi" is associated to
"insight.exe".
- - Then observe that, when shelling out, the necessary commands get
assembled in $ROURA$.BAT (in my case located in %TEMP%\ARACHNE.TMP). This
is a temporary batch file. It gets executed then deleted.
- - The query string location depends on how the respective line in mime.cfg looks
like. If "$s" is used, the query string is passed as an argument of
program call command in $ROURA$.BAT. If "$q" is used, the query string
is found in $QUERY$.TMP (in the same temporary directory). A bit like
"GET" and "POST" methods :). Process any dgi type form (like reply to an
e-mail message) and get a snapshot of these two files.
All you need is a mean to parse the query string, then pass it to the
DBMS. If only there was a Perl or TCL for DOS...
Regards
Cristian Burneci
On Wed, 1 Jan 2003 18:18:36 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<snip>
> Shelling out to a program is just that - shelling OUT. The user must
> still maneuver through the outside program's interface. If a DBMS looked
> and operated exactly like an HTML form, then there would be no problem.
> But none of them do.
> My desire is to see a DBMS interface that operates from an HTML form.
> When someone is taught how to use Arachne and HTML, they would
> simultaneously be able to use a database. I work mostly with people who
> are not familiar with electronic equipment. Lesson One is the on-off
> switch. Teaching two separate (and fundamentally different) program
> interfaces is counter productive to quick developmental progress.
> Such a HTML-DBMS Arachne interface would open up a lot of opportunities
> for all Arachne users. I've received several emails (off list) from
> Arachnoids using CD-ROMs as a data server, although the data is
> pre-formatted in TXT or HTM files. DB files would be even more flexible,
> allowing comparisons, and-or, if-then, and a bunch of other handy
> commands.
>> Finally, a tip about EEK and OOK files...Read the docs folks! Plain
>> as day,
> Apparently not, if "folks" (plural) keep asking. Rumor has it that EEK
> was originally a verbal exclamation from an early Arachne user, who was
> trying to figure out the file scheme and structure.
> By the way, if the instructions were in a database format, they would
> have been quickly located and consolidated. Hence, fewer questions to the
> list.
>> OK, enough for todays lessons...Happy New Year!
> Ditto.
> Bob
> -
> ________________________________________________________________
> Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
> Only $9.95 per month!
> Visit www.juno.com
- -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser for DOS
- http://arachne.cz/
- -- Arachne V1.71;UE01, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 08:30:42-0400
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Comments on the DMCA and te TPCA
On 30 Dec 2002 12:16:43 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote:
>Hi Samuel!
>23 Dec 2002, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SH> It is believed that the law will be passed and that even President
> SH> Bush will sign his approval of it.
> Sam ... I really like your sense of humour !!!
> Have litterally been laughing out loud for many minutes ...
> that EVEN is sooooo wonderful ...
What I said was not intended as a humorous comment at all. It was a
serious critical comment. Republicans are always saying that
support of free enterprise and innovation is a cornerstone of their
political philosophy. Here they are being inconsistent in coming out in
favor of a law which would stifle competition in the development of
computer software and hardware and operating systems. How can a GOOD
Republican support the DMCA and the TPCA?
> SH> It is my opinion that the law, if passed, would soon be repealed due
> SH> to popular protest.
> Where is the american protest ??
The only reason you don't find many Americans protesting is that
most of them don't even know about the DMCA and TPCA. I didn't find
out about it untill just recently by your posting about it on this
mailing list.
> America was thinking about the DMCA.
> In Europe it was immediately discussed, and opposed.
> America introduced the DMCA.
> Europe still opposed it.
> Most americans seem not even to have *NOTICED* it.
We don't NOTICE it because it isn't being widely mentioned and
commented upon here. Only a very few Americans know about it.
> America thinks about mandatory TCPA fearures.
> Europe discusses snd opposes it.
> America is silent.
> America introduces ....
> Do you get the picture ??
SH> If it is not repealed I think it would be overturned by the courts due
SH> to concerns as to its constitutionality and over concerns about how it
SH> violates the anti-monopoly laws.
Has not yet happened with the DMCA.
A law cannot be repealed or overturned until after it is passed. Before
a proposed law is passed it could be killed in committee, which is
probably what would happen with this proposed law if enough Americans
were aware that such legislation were under serious consideration.
> SH> If the law is passed, and if the law stands, I think it will open up a
> SH> lucrative black-market for technicians and hackers who would soon
> SH> learn of a way to bypass and defeat the new technology to be installed
> SH> on the new DMCA and TPCA compliant computers.
> Sure ... but this is irrelevant.
> RIAA wants to stop joe average from copying his CDs etc.
> They don't care about advanced hackers. There are too few of them.
> The only thing that matters is that the hackers can't find a way to circumvent
> the measures for Joe average, because this would hurt their $$$.
> They have tried with software only, and miserably failed.
> So they need TPCA.
> As long as you have TCPA computers Joe average will NOT be able to copy.
Joe Average knows that it is of course a very simple thing to capture
an audio output and copy it onto any media he wants, whether to an audio
cassette, a reel-to-reel tape, a CD, or even to a vinyl record. DMCA and
TPCA technology will not be an effective preventative for copyright theft.
> SH> Also there would be ways for overseas computer manufacturers to
> SH> continue to manufacture computers without DMCA and TPCA technology and
> SH> arrange to have them smuggled into the US.
> Sure ...
> These dealers will be prosecuted by the police.
Only if they get caught.
> Conclusio:
> Americans stop to shut up, turn on your brain, and oppose the passing of
> silly laws.
> And don't forget that there are lobby controlled idiots in high positions ...
> actually very high ones :((
For every powerful lobby group there is also an anti-lobby group.
Sometimes the anti-lobby group influences more voters than the lobby
group. This is certainly the case when we look at the very powerful
and rich tobacco lobby. Despite all the support and money the lobby
is getting from the tobacco industry the anti-smoking crusaders keep
winning. The only politicians the tobacco lobby can control are those
who represent major tobacco-pruducing states such as Virginia and North
Carolina.
Sam Heywood
P.S. I am using NetMail Pro because I am currently in a travel mode, and I
am using my laptop, and I am having a problem with its internal mouse right
now. Unlike Clarence, I don't know how to operate Arachne very well at all
without a mouse. I will just acquire and install an external mouse later.
- -- Message sent by Net-Mail Pro (DOS). See http://www.nettamer.net/xagent.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 08:31:01-0400
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why can't you simply do FTP instead of doing "browser upload"?
On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:16:43 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote:
Hi Samuel!
> 23 Dec 2002, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SH> As most of you all know, Arachne and other normal internet browsers
> SH> do not come with the totally unecessary and undesireable feature of
> SH> having a "browser upload" function like the one that is incorporated
> SH> into the bloatware browsers MSIE and NetScape.
> first how many NORMAL browsers do you know that do NOT incorporate this
> trivial feature ?
> second it is not only incorporated into MSIE and NS, but also into mozilla,
> netscape, lynx ........................
I have not found such a feature in Opera. Lynx386 doesn't have it. The
Phoenix browser, being a compact version of Mozilla doesn't have it. The
earlier versions of NetScape and MSIE did not have it. In the early days
of NetScape and MSIE people were doing FTP.
> SH> When I write to the web site tech support people to ask if I can
> SH> simply do FTP instead, they answer with a resounding "NO".
> too much work for them.
> They need to set up a FTP server with write rights for all accounts they have.
> and furthermore FTP is pure CRAP. (the protocol is badly designed, and there
> are many security risks in the FTP daemons.)
Are the security risks with FTP any greater than with Telnet? With FTP
and with Telnet you have to send your password in the clear.
> SH> Why can't you simply do FTP instead of doing "browser upload"?
> SH> The techies say you can't do it, but they refuse to explain why.
> The 2 are completely independant.
> The webapplications often use PHP (or similar scripting language) to do the
> work. There a HTTP upload is trivial ... and you can restrict it to already
> authenticated sessions.
> If you want to use FTP, than you have to set up a FTP server (and therefor open
> up a big security hole), and furthermore you need to solve the authentication
> problem, and you need to solve how the web application gets the filename.
SH> Isn't plain old ordinary FTP still the standard and normal and
SH> most universally acceptable method for transferring files?
> NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> FTP uses cleartext authentication ... therefor it MUST NOT be used for anything
> other than anopnymous access.
> But it still is used for distributing software via anonymous FTP.
> Don't mix these 2 issues.
I use SFTP for servers which allow it. SFTP encrypts the password.
> SH> Another question: Why did the developers of MSIE and NetScape even
> SH> ever want to incorporate a "browser upload" feature?
> Because it is VERY handy.
> SH> This is certainly not a feature that any normal browser should have.
> in your oppinion.
> Mine is different :)
> SH> This kind of feature certainly is not needed. It serves only to make
> SH> the browser more bloated and to run more slowly.
> The implementation is not hard, and everybody has another definition of bloat.
> This trivial and useful feature is sure not bloat for me.
Until after having considered all your thoughts on this matter I used to
think of the incorporation of the HTTP upload feature as just another plot
to increase browser bloat. Hence the reason for my question. Thanks for
your opinions.
> SH> Sam Heywood
> CU, Ricsi
> PS: Michael we are talking about pre mozilla netscapes :))
> Netscape 3 and 4 are older than mozilla ... :)
Sam Heywood
- -- Message sent by Net-Mail Pro (DOS). See http://www.nettamer.net/xagent.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 08:30:53-0400
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why can't you simply do FTP instaea of doing "browser upload"?
On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:16:44 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote:
> Hi Samuel!
> 23 Dec 2002, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SH> Is it just a mechanism for calling a routine compiled into the main
> SH> browser program?
> yes
> SH> Is this routine nothing more than a quite ordinary FTP
> SH> program that Bill Gates probably stole from somebody else?
> FTP and HTTP are completely different protocols !!!
> HTTP upload is a feature specified in the HTTP RFC that makes it possible to
> send files from the client to the server.
> FTP has *NOTHING* to do with it !!!!!!!!!
> SH> The Micro$oft brainwashed techies think that "http upload" or "browser
> SH> upload" is something truly different,
> and they are 100% right
OK, so they are right in this case. They would have had much more
credibility with me if they had simply explained it. I don't like
their "It_is_true_because_I_said_so" attitude because we know they are
often wrong about many things.
> SH> and something that uses the latest and greatest protocols that are
> SH> needed for negotiating with all the web sites incorporating the latest
> SH> Micro$oft "standards".
> has nothing to do with microsoft.
> I have used it with a little project under linux, and it was VERY handy, and
> saved me much work.
Yep, Glenn explained this recently. He said that he plans to incorporate
HTTP upload in a future users' edition of Arachne. Maybe the two
protocols have to be different because they use different ports.
Sam Heywood
- -- Message sent by Net-Mail Pro (DOS). See http://www.nettamer.net/xagent.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 10:37:10 -0500 (EST)
From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why can't you simply do FTP instead of doing "browser upload"?
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have not found such a feature in Opera. Lynx386 doesn't have it. The
> Phoenix browser, being a compact version of Mozilla doesn't have it. The
> earlier versions of NetScape and MSIE did not have it. In the early days
> of NetScape and MSIE people were doing FTP.
I don't know what you mean by "earlier" but just as a
point of clarity, Netscape 3.x has http upload. Matter of
fact back in the days when I was a forum manager at Delphi
Internet Services, that was the *only* way to upload to
forum web filespace.
(other protocols were still in effect for VMS shell upload,
but that was to the file database space rather than
webspace)
- --
Steve Ackman
http://twoloonscoffee.com (Need green beans?)
http://twovoyagers.com (glass, linux & other stuff)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 09:39:50-0400
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: arachne-digest V1 # 2002
On Wed, 1 Jan 2003 13:53:24 -0600 Glenn Gilbreath Jr.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> OK, the final topic is MTA, mail transport agent...while it
> is true there are quite a number for DOS, I still vote for
> NetMail DOS 2.12 by Marc Ressl...it is faster and easier
> to setup than any other I've tried, which includes FDSMTPOP.
<snip>
I have tried NetMail DOS 2.12 by Marc Ressl and have tried also FDSMTPOP.
Also I have tried many other mail transport agents for DOS. I agree that
NetMail DOS 2.12 is among the most easy to set up and use.
In my experience the easiest of all to set up and use is NetMail Pro
by David Colston, author of Nettamer. The program comes with its own
internal PPP dialer and packet driver. I like NetMail Pro so much for
its simplicity and reliability that I even registered my copy.
The reason why I am using this program instead of Arachne right now is
that I am currently travelling with my laptop and the infernal internal
mouse is running wild and I can't control it. I have the kind which has
a tiny little control stick that pokes out of the middle of the keyboard.
At the slightest touch it goes wild and races all over the screen. I
can't hold it still so as to position it on a spot long enough to click
on it. I will disable the internal mouse and I will acquire and install
an external mouse later. Unlike Clarence, I never learned how to use
Arachne without a mouse.
Sam Heywood
P.S. I am shopping for a mini-mouse for my laptop. I used to have one
many years ago. It was very small. It worked just like a standard size
mouse and it worked fine. I lost it and I can't find another one.
- -- Message sent by Net-Mail Pro (DOS). See http://www.nettamer.net/xagent.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 16:25:29 +0100 (CET)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter)
Subject: Why can't you simply do FTP instead of doing "browser upload"?
Hi sheywood!
02 Jan 2003, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> SH> As most of you all know, Arachne and other normal internet
>> SH> browsers do not come with the totally unecessary and
>> SH> undesireable feature of having a "browser upload" function like
>> SH> the one that is incorporated into the bloatware browsers MSIE
>> SH> and NetScape.
>> first how many NORMAL browsers do you know that do NOT incorporate
>> this trivial feature ? second it is not only incorporated into MSIE
>> and NS, but also into mozilla, netscape, lynx ...
s> I have not found such a feature in Opera.
I have just tried it ... it is there ... (in ancient opera 5)
s> Lynx386 doesn't have it.
works just great with this version.
Lynx Version 2.8.4dev.7 (03 Aug 2000)
s> The Phoenix browser, being a compact version of Mozilla doesn't have
s> it.
Phoenix *DOES* support it !!!
So every browser I tried supports it correctly.
except arachne
s> The earlier versions of NetScape and MSIE did not have it.
they have it ... at least NS 2.02+ (haven't used earlier versions)
I'm sure IE has it loooooooooooong time as well, but I have never used it.
s> In the early days of NetScape and MSIE people were doing FTP.
But the browsers still supported the RFC HTTP upload !
>> SH> When I write to the web site tech support people to ask if I can
>> SH> simply do FTP instead, they answer with a resounding "NO".
>> too much work for them.
>> They need to set up a FTP server with write rights for all accounts
>> they have. and furthermore FTP is pure CRAP. (the protocol is badly
>> designed, and there are many security risks in the FTP daemons.)
s> Are the security risks with FTP any greater than with Telnet?
yes
s> With FTP and with Telnet you have to send your password in the clear.
yes, but FTP has additionally to sending everything in the clear, a very error
prone protocol.
I wrote this already by saying that there are many security risks in the FTP
software.
s> I use SFTP for servers which allow it. SFTP encrypts the password.
good
s> the incorporation of the HTTP upload feature as just another plot to
s> increase browser bloat.
should not be ... arachne has everything to handle it ...
so implementing it should be easy.
s> Sam Heywood
CU, Ricsi
- --
|~)o _ _o Richard Menedetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> {ICQ: 7659421} (PGP)
|~\|(__\| -=> If you cut here, you'll ruin your monitor <=-
------------------------------
End of arachne-digest V1 #2003
******************************
